ISMRRD director debates
recommendation for closure
(Continued from Page 1)
"They (the subcommittee) looked at Grossman said that "to maintain a
what they saw and said this is bad, let's commitment like that is naive. The
get rid of it, without any thought toward clinic provided a conduit to other units
the implications. Frankly, I find that in the University, but alone, it can't
offensive." _fulfill a commitment to research in
GROSSMAN'S statement, however, mental retardation."
contradicts what he told the subcom- He said the recommendation to keep
mittee during a review interview, ac- the clinic "tremendously oversim-
cording to some members of the sub- plifies one of the most difficult
committee who requested anonimity. problems we have."
"We asked him (Grossman) if there Grossman's statement asks for a
were any compelling reasons against Program in Mental Retardation and
closure (of ISMRRD)," one member Related Disorders, funded by the new
said, "and he said no." "He said there grant money along with "other resour-
wasn't a core group of people left, and ces" from the University.
that unless the University would GROSSMAN also suggests a Univer-
allocate more funds it would be better sity-wide committee to examine the
to close it (ISMRRD) completely." role of the University in the area of
A second member added that the mental retardation and to establish
subcommittee members were guidelines for future directions in the
"shocked that he said that." study and research of retardation and
VICTOR Hawthorne, a. professor of related disorders.
epidemiology and a member of the Grossman came to the University in
review subcommittee, would not say February, 1981 from the University of
that Grossman suggested closing the California at Los Angeles to direct
institute, but said that the subcommit- ISMRRD. When he arrived, he said, the
tee's recommendation to close "was problems ISMRRD had were well
very close to what he (Grossman) in- documented, and he, in effect, was
tended." charged with "cleaning up" the
programs.
Grossman denied suggesting the He said he sent a letter in February
closure of the institute, but did say he 1982 to Frye asking for "administrative
told the subcommittee that ISMRRD, in help and guidance," and said yesterday
wits presetformeadrse man probemsn he thought it"unfortunate that our
wicht had to bote.desdi h n request for help was translated by the
tutewa to continue, administration into a charge ... for
Grossman said that it would not be possible reduction or closure."
practical or even desirable for the "THE UNIVERSITY was well aware
University to continue ISMRRD as it is. of the problems (with ISMRRD) when
"As it was and as it is, it isn't feasible," they approached me, and the idea was
he said, to clean them up," he said. He also said
GROSSMAN said his suggestion was that President Shapiro "was talking in
that the University "explore the op the neighborhood of five or ten years to
Mtions. No one has suggested that what turn it around, not a year and a half."
we have is what we ought to be. I cer- Vice President Frye said the decision
tainly haven't, but I suggested that if to review ISMRRD after Grossman
the University wants to make a sincere arrived was not a "change of heart,"
commitment, they should look at the a but rather was necessitated by
problem, the resources, and the poten- changing economic possibilities for the
tial options," he said.Unvriy
The ubcomitte reommeded Grossman likewise said he did not
that the institute be eliminated except believe the decision to review ISMRRD
for its Child Development Clinic. Ac- for reduction or elimination was done
cording to subcommittee members, the "willingly or by design," to alter the
} Child Development Clinic was chosen to commitment made to him, but said
be saved to keep some research into "had I known in December, 1980 what I
mental retardation on campus, and know now, I would have never packed
maintain a commitment to study in that up the truck and come out here."
area.
Women's ed. center praised
(ConUnued from Page ) feasibility of a sliding fee schedule for
non-university students.
toward female students, especially The review committee was charged
those whose education has been in- with determining the extent to which
terrupted by family obligations or the the center's services are duplicated by
need to work. In addition to its coun- other University units and whether the
seling and scholarship programs, the University would gain more if the cen-
center has sponsored a wide variety of ter were in some part reorganized or
internships, conferences, workshops, reassigned.
and publications, and has served as an COMMITTEE members agreed that
advocate for non-traditional students. little or no money would be saved if the
The committee said in its report that center's programs were reassigned to
the quality and visibility of the center other University units, stating in the
shows that the University is committed report: "The center is an outstanding
to the advancement of women in higher example of synergy. The whole is
education, and that withdrawal of this greater than the sum of its parts, and
support might be interpreted as the we find this to be a compelling case for
University abandoning an entire retaining the whole."
population to save a few dollars. Committee member Thomas Holt
AMONG ITS recommendations, said the aregument that recommending
which Campbell said she will discuss CCEW for a major budgetary review
with Frye, next week, the committee would hurt the Unviersity's image
suggested that the CCEW Executive played a role in the committee's
Committee take on a more active role decision. "That came forth in the in-
at the center, that the University should formation we gathered," lie said.
"provide for regular and secure fun- He explained, however, "it was not
ding" for the center's Women in Scien- the primary concern in the decision we
ce program, and that the center should rendered," and added that the commit-
not attempt to take in male clients, tee found that the center was, "one that
In the report, the committee also deserved emulation ... rather than one
,recommended that the CCEW study the See CCEW. Page 7
The Michigan Daily-Wednesday, July 21, 1982--Page 5
U U'
~~ B
UH [
UU U U
Mi ~
U1 jKEj
UHLWE!IJ
u~7wERfjJ
C3LLLZ'\FP
CLLL&I,
CIEi8Q[
CL~l&A
ILJ\R
CILLJL%
open!.
341 east liberty, at division st.
non-profit student bookstore .